Rework Aegis NOW please

[LiveWire___]

WG.

 

I don't tend to whinge about OPs much.

 

But, since the rework, Aegis has become all but impossible to win. Let alone with 5 stars.

 

Akulov is sunk within 5 minutes. Smith dies even sooner. Often before the first bot wave is killed.

 

The bot reinforcements from the north decimate the team before the first wave is dead. Then, the escorting bots join in from the north. Most of the team is dead by this point. Even sailing past south island to hook around north to flank the bots doesn't work anymore.

 

Then, 2x more Nagatos plus an Amagi appear. By now, I'm often alone. 

 

If any previous Nagatos survive, they begin sinking transports.

 

I just quit a battle (report away), because I knew I'd be wasting my time fighting on.

 

Aegis is also one of the most common ops to appear for me. Even before the rework, I hated it. It was just so mundane.

 

Please, for the love of all that is holy, rework this mess. 

 

Not that I think this impassioned plea will achieve anything.  

 

 

 

[Ronchabale]

How many do you think will answer your poll ?

 

 Aegis needs a rework ?

No, while it is one of the more challenging ops I think its fine as it is

If players can´t handle bots in ops (where the bots more or less line up to be shot) pehaps they should try coop

[Deksi_4]

6 hours ago, LiveWire___ said:

WG.

 

I don't tend to whinge about OPs much.

 

But, since the rework, Aegis has become all but impossible to win. Let alone with 5 stars.

 

Akulov is sunk within 5 minutes. Smith dies even sooner. Often before the first bot wave is killed.

 

The bot reinforcements from the north decimate the team before the first wave is dead. Then, the escorting bots join in from the north. Most of the team is dead by this point. Even sailing past south island to hook around north to flank the bots doesn't work anymore.

 

Then, 2x more Nagatos plus an Amagi appear. By now, I'm often alone. 

 

If any previous Nagatos survive, they begin sinking transports.

 

I just quit a battle (report away), because I knew I'd be wasting my time fighting on.

 

Aegis is also one of the most common ops to appear for me. Even before the rework, I hated it. It was just so mundane.

 

Please, for the love of all that is holy, rework this mess. 

 

Not that I think this impassioned plea will achieve anything.  

 

 

 

@LiveWire___You are masochist indeed😅seriosly I quit playing operations a lot time ago even before operations rework because a lot of players didnt knew how to perform the most basics tasks, and didnt knew from which side bots arrive. I dont want to waste energy playing with random teams.

I suppose you are playing solo operations. My advice to you is to play operations only in division if you can, if not you will have the time of your life😅

[Seraphice]

A rework of Aegis is most certainly not in sight.

As I mentioned in various other threads, we may decide to slightly adjust her balance if we think it is necessary, but for now it does not seem so - there are still plenty of people around who think the operation is fine as is as well.

 

Happy holidays Captain!
~Sera

[LiveWire___]

3 hours ago, Ronchabale said:

How many do you think will answer your poll ?

 

 Aegis needs a rework ?

No, while it is one of the more challenging ops I think its fine as it is

If players can´t handle bots in ops (where the bots more or less line up to be shot) pehaps they should try coop

 

How many will answer my poll?

 

I dont know. Why dont you create a poll and ask?

 

Presumably the "they" you're referring to is "me". 

 

I can handle bots, and do so most times. 

 

In this battle, however, they most certainly do not line up to be shot. They act as described by me, making this op incredibly difficult. 

 

And no, I will not try co-op.

 

It's game mode which, IMHO, is pointless for anything but finishing off the last few niggling points of combat missions etc. 

[LiveWire___]

1 hour ago, Seraphice said:

A rework of Aegis is most certainly not in sight.

As I mentioned in various other threads, we may decide to slightly adjust her balance if we think it is necessary, but for now it does not seem so - there are still plenty of people around who think the operation is fine as is as well.

 

Happy holidays Captain!
~Sera

 

Have you done a poll?

 

How many is "plenty", and where are your figures? 

[Seraphice]

17 minutes ago, LiveWire___ said:

 

Have you done a poll?

 

How many is "plenty", and where are your figures? 

We have 10s of CMs reading Forums, Discord, Facebook, Reddit, Social Media practically every day. And just from what I see it is not a unanimous agreement that aegis needs a rework, as is also currently shown by your own poll.

 

Happy holidays Captain!
~Sera

[LiveWire___]

4 minutes ago, Seraphice said:

We have 10s of CMs reading Forums, Discord, Facebook, Reddit, Social Media practically every day. And just from what I see it is not a unanimous agreement that aegis needs a rework, as is also currently shown by your own poll.

 

Happy holidays Captain!
~Sera

 

You'd need to do a proper poll to gauge opinion on this one, not just your gut.

 

My poll was started last night, so I wouldn't expect it to show anything meaningful yet. 

 

Other than 62.5% of the 8 people who voted in favour of a rework, that is. 

 

[DanSilverwing]

I would like to say that it was working perfectly in its original configuration, but that's not true. Aegis has a history of occasional weird pathing issues creating failure.

 

But the fact remains that it did usually work as intended in its original configuration as a Tier-6 only Operation.

 

Wargaming gave the community what it wanted (more high-tier Operations) in the laziest possible way by super-imposing higher tier ships into small maps designed for shorter-range and slower-paced engagements without testing prior to releasing on Live. And the results speak for themselves. Instead of widening engagement they have increased the entry barrier to be effective away from new players with Tier 6 ships.

 

So Wargaming could fix these issues by reverting back to their original Tier and National restrictions, but as @Seraphice has confirmed there is no such intention. So these issues will never be "fixed", only tinkered with in a futile attempt to ameliorate their original sin of breaking the original creative vision.

 

WG didn't listen to LWM, the're not going to listen now.

[lup3s]

I don't think Aegis needs to be reworked, but the bots need some tweaking - especially the pathfinding.

 

A rework that could help is a player(base) rework so most are actually competent 

[Ubertron_X]

34 minutes ago, lup3s said:

I don't think Aegis needs to be reworked, but the bots need some tweaking - especially the pathfinding.

 

A rework that could help is a player(base) rework so most are actually competent 

Or set up Aegis on a map where it actually works? Apart from mustering every single inch of DPM that you can AND propelling yourself towards the enemy at YOLO speeds, the setup and terrain leaves you all but bad choices (at least the obvious ones).

 

Go West like the Shchors does? Islands blocking the 1st enemy force most of the way until you end up in a bloody melee and if your DPM doesnt hold up and at least parts of your team that inevitably lingered behind will succumb to the 2nd enemy force entering from the NW.

Go North yourself to better engage the 2nd enemy force? Islands blocking the 1st enemy force even more until you will find the Shchors sunk and yourself in a crossfire from 1st and 2nd enemy force soon.

Go South to avoid the 2nd enemy force for longer? Islands blocking the 1st enemy force even more until you will find the Shchors sunk and your team separated, one part getting hammered by the 2nd enemy force, the other by the original 1st enemy force.

 

If you set up this exact scenario, position and timing on Ocean things would play out very differently, just saying.

 

Note that I am ok with operations being more difficult per se, however this specific operation is not only more difficult, it also is not intuitive at all (see bad choices above), which probably is the main reason why a lot of them fail.

[KillStealBoss]

It's a challenging one and I like it the way it is. The playerbase is bad and that needs a big "GIT GUD". 

[invicta2012]

1 hour ago, KillStealBoss said:

The playerbase is bad and that needs a big "GIT GUD". 

Nah. It's not well balanced. Bring the wrong ship and you'll be very little use and have very little fun. The mode doesn't adapt to ship choices / builds as it is supposed to, and because you don't know which Op you'll get when you enter the queue there's the strong possibility of bringing a yacht to a power boat race. It was fair to criticise people for their ship choices / lack of preparation when it was Operation of the Week, but when it's a lucky dip? Not really. 

[Ymustihaveaname]

8 minutes ago, invicta2012 said:

Nah. It's not well balanced. Bring the wrong ship and you'll be very little use and have very little fun. The mode doesn't adapt to ship choices / builds as it is supposed to, and because you don't know which Op you'll get when you enter the queue there's the strong possibility of bringing a yacht to a power boat race. It was fair to criticise people for their ship choices / lack of preparation when it was Operation of the Week, but when it's a lucky dip? Not really. 

Are there not ships that are good for all the operations? OR really just pick a ship the player is good at playing and play it to its strengths and hope the rest of the team does the same, it should work but it doesn't always happen?

 

I tend to play Massa, that I find relatively strong in all operations? I prefer DDs most of the rest of the time (ie randoms/CBs) but think they are weaker in ops.

[lup3s]

1 hour ago, Ubertron_X said:

Or set up Aegis on a map where it actually works? Apart from mustering every single inch of DPM that you can AND propelling yourself towards the enemy at YOLO speeds, the setup and terrain leaves you all but bad choices (at least the obvious ones).

 

Go West like the Shchors does? Islands blocking the 1st enemy force most of the way until you end up in a bloody melee and if your DPM doesnt hold up and at least parts of your team that inevitably lingered behind will succumb to the 2nd enemy force entering from the NW.

Go North yourself to better engage the 2nd enemy force? Islands blocking the 1st enemy force even more until you will find the Shchors sunk and yourself in a crossfire from 1st and 2nd enemy force soon.

Go South to avoid the 2nd enemy force for longer? Islands blocking the 1st enemy force even more until you will find the Shchors sunk and your team separated, one part getting hammered by the 2nd enemy force, the other by the original 1st enemy force.

 

If you set up this exact scenario, position and timing on Ocean things would play out very differently, just saying.

 

Note that I am ok with operations being more difficult per se, however this specific operation is not only more difficult, it also is not intuitive at all (see bad choices above), which probably is the main reason why a lot of them fail.

 

I usually take the West / North-West route :

- you can shoot the first wave

- you can shoot the second wave

- you can shoot the escorts

 

I think an issue is that many players (especially BBs) go down the G/H-line, putting themselves out of the fight - not super long, but too long.

Also, many players seem to want to (mindlessly) farm damage without trying to secure a good flow of the Operation in total; e.g. I see way too many CA/CLs shooting the CAs and BBs in the first wave instead of the Kitakazes.

Also, many players seem oblivious to the fact that AP can be more devastating than HE, but you need to get broadsides for that - too many times I see CAs shooting HE from a flanking position, or BBs neutering their firing power because they're "crossing the T" (which happens a lot in Aegis btw, too many times more than half the team is "crossing the T" of the escort ships).

 

Also, as @DFens_666 and @Saltface can confirm, a good cooperation of players / ships does wonders in Operations - sadly too many players do not really play to the "function" of their ship.

[DirtyHeddy]

A complete rework might not be neccessary, but a few minor adjustments appear to be quite recommendable

• A slight reduction of the bots' firechance (maybe by 99.9%) would be ok
• Delay spwaning of the second wave by 30 seconds, Convoy by one minute
• some measures to prevent spotting of the first wave too early

That would even the odds a little ...

[lup3s]

4 minutes ago, Ymustihaveaname said:

Are there not ships that are good for all the operations? OR really just pick a ship the player is good at playing and play it to its strengths and hope the rest of the team does the same, it should work but it doesn't always happen?

 

I tend to play Massa, that I find relatively strong in all operations? I prefer DDs most of the rest of the time (ie randoms/CBs) but think they are weaker in ops.

 

Le Terrible / Le Fantasque 

Akizuki / Harekaze

Hsienyang

 

All are strong to very strong in Ops 

 

Further, I find the best all-round ships to be Cruisers with their own Smoke Screen consumable, though most tend to be Premium :

Kutuzov,

Rochester (smoke + USN AP, no Radar though),

Anchorage (but I think Rochester is better),

Harbin (extra strong torpedo power),

Edinburgh (sadly no HE, single torps are strong)

 

Others that do well but have to be played a bit more cautiously since they have no smoke to disengage :

Bayard, Charles Martel, Mainz, D7P, Baltimore, Mogami

 

 

With regards to BBs, I found the Flandre to be quite strong, along with Massa, Brandenburg, Tirpitz / Bismarck, Atlantico ... basically any BB with decent/good secondaries 

[invicta2012]

15 minutes ago, Ymustihaveaname said:

Are there not ships that are good for all the operations? OR really just pick a ship the player is good at playing and play it to its strengths and hope the rest of the team does the same, it should work but it doesn't always happen?

 

I tend to play Massa, that I find relatively strong in all operations? I prefer DDs most of the rest of the time (ie randoms/CBs) but think they are weaker in ops.

 

3 minutes ago, lup3s said:

Le Terrible / Le Fantasque 

Akizuki / Harekaze

Hsienyang

 

All are strong to very strong in Ops 

 

Further, I find the best all-round ships to be Cruisers with their own Smoke Screen consumable, though most tend to be Premium :

Kutuzov,

Rochester (smoke + USN AP, no Radar though),

Anchorage (but I think Rochester is better),

Harbin (extra strong torpedo power),

Edinburgh (sadly no HE, single torps are strong)

 

Others that do well but have to be played a bit more cautiously since they have no smoke to disfiengage :

Bayard, Charles Martel, Mainz, D7P, Baltimore, Mogami

 

 

With regards to BBs, I found the Flandre to be quite strong, along with Massa, Brandenburg, Tirpitz / Bismarck, Atlantico ... basically any BB with decent/good secondaries 

 

I agree with a lot of the above, but the choices get fewer the lower Tier you go. There are still plenty of viable ships at Tier VII for all Operations, but when you get into Tier VI you're at the mercy of the game and which Op it sends you into. Tier VI DDs can have very short torpedo ranges (I think 8km is probably par, unless you're a Farragut ace), Tier VI cruisers can work (hello Leander) but CAs will struggle, Tier VI CVs melt under the high tier AA and Tier VI BBs which can't make 25+ knots are just going to be painful to play. 

[Ymustihaveaname]

5 minutes ago, lup3s said:

All are strong to very strong in Ops

I just found playing anything but a secondary BB hard to ensure wins if your team gets an op that requires escorting a convoy or CV for example and your BBs dont escort and stay in front of the convoy to tank the damage from it......

[Ymustihaveaname]

2 minutes ago, invicta2012 said:

I agree with a lot of the above, but the choices get fewer the lower Tier you go. There are still plenty of viable ships at Tier VII for all Operations, but when you get into Tier VI you're at the mercy of the game and which Op it sends you into. Tier VI DDs can have very short torpedo ranges (I think 8km is probably par, unless you're a Farragut ace), Tier VI cruisers can work (hello Leander) but CAs will struggle, Tier VI CVs melt under the high tier AA and Tier VI BBs which can't make 25+ knots are just going to be painful to play. 

What is the MM like for T6/7, I have not played as a T6/7 much how often are you UT with t7/8 ships and is it worth/nice playing as T6s?

[LiveWire___]

Another Aegis loss.

 

Sank 4x ships in my myoko. Akulov dead within 5 mins.

 

A liberty ship even sank a myoko by ramming.

 

Friendly skane left over sailing around in circles ineffectually sniping 2x Nagatos for last 5 mins.

 

This is utterly broken. 

 

I win Hermes and Cherry Blossom more often than this awful mission. 

[Cyclops_]

1 hour ago, LiveWire___ said:

Another Aegis loss.

 

Sank 4x ships in my myoko. Akulov dead within 5 mins.

 

A liberty ship even sank a myoko by ramming.

 

Friendly skane left over sailing around in circles ineffectually sniping 2x Nagatos for last 5 mins.

 

This is utterly broken. 

 

I win Hermes and Cherry Blossom more often than this awful mission. 

If it was easy  the first time, then all it does is get easier, the idea of Scenarios is to learn from your mistakes, and with only 4 ships sunk by your self, then have you learned???, pick a ship you know that will be good in all the various scenarios. A DD that has plenty of torps with a quick reload, A CA with high rate of fire or one with smoke etc etc

[Ubertron_X]

53 minutes ago, Cyclops_ said:

If it was easy  the first time, then all it does is get easier, the idea of Scenarios is to learn from your mistakes, and with only 4 ships sunk by your self, then have you learned???, pick a ship you know that will be good in all the various scenarios. A DD that has plenty of torps with a quick reload, A CA with high rate of fire or one with smoke etc etc

Am I the only one that thinks that Operation's 'locking out' certain ships is somewhat strange? I mean, if I like my Kii I want to play my Kii and not my secondary specc'ed Tirpitz. Its a bit like WG saying: Yeah, we know that secondary spec ships and gunboats often s*ck in random battles, here have some Operations. If you eliminate all non-tanky, non-secondary BBs, all low DPM / no smoke CAs and slow torp reload / low DPM DDs, the list of ships that are suited for Operations gets rather short rather quickly.

[Ronchabale]

48 minutes ago, Ubertron_X said:

Am I the only one that thinks that Operation's 'locking out' certain ships is somewhat strange? I mean, if I like my Kii I want to play my Kii and not my secondary specc'ed Tirpitz. Its a bit like WG saying: Yeah, we know that secondary spec ships and gunboats often s*ck in random battles, here have some Operations. If you eliminate all non-tanky, non-secondary BBs, all low DPM / no smoke CAs and slow reload / low DPM DDs, the list of ships that is suited for Operations gets rather short rather quickly.

Had some pretty good scores on Narai and Aegis with the Kii but there are plenty worse BB:s (Vlad, Alabama)

Agree tho that sec spec Massa, Flandre, Brandenburg etc. are simply "better" 

Zeiten with Lutjenz, sec spec, hydro and 12km torps hmm.. 

 

 

[LiveWire___]

1 hour ago, Cyclops_ said:

If it was easy  the first time, then all it does is get easier, the idea of Scenarios is to learn from your mistakes, and with only 4 ships sunk by your self, then have you learned???, pick a ship you know that will be good in all the various scenarios. A DD that has plenty of torps with a quick reload, A CA with high rate of fire or one with smoke etc etc

 

Mate.

 

I've been playing this scenario for years. I know what works.

 

Except in this iteration.

 

It is completely unbalanced, for all the reasons I have already gone through.